Republicans 2013: Damn... Gov't actually does create jobs & wealth (Representatives, military, companies)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If the money is spend on infrastructure and educating citizen, and then yes, government does build wealth. But unfortunate, it is not the case.
Even then they have to take this funding from others to do these things. If the money wasn't taken those that provide the money could do it themselves.
Of course we would never allow individuals to get 17 trillion in debt.
Depends. Is the alternative to $1T being given to B that A just puts it in a trust fund for the next 30 years, where it only earns $ for the company managing it? If so, orders of magnitude more wealth is being created by B.
B/c I say so? No. B/c Republicans are running around like their a$$e$ are on fire to exempt themselves from jobs losses & economic hurt that comes from gutting gov't spending? Yep...
What stimulates the economy more: putting $5 in your savings account or $5 in a business' checking account?
Perfectly said, so we can assume that every Conservative in this thread will ignore it...
Does the economy know the difference between a $1 that's come from a public employer vs a private employer?
Yes. Everytime the phrase "gov't doesn't create jobs" or "gov't doesn't create wealth" gets uttered, that's exactly what they're saying. Is it my fault that Republicans don't know what words mean, or how putting them together creates statements? Nope. If you have a problem w/ that, talk to the sloganeers.
Of course the government builds wealth. The government builds infrastructure, educates citizens, and provides the environment for entrepreneurs to take risks. Countries with large public investments do better than countries with little public investments.
The wealth creating part has been touched on already, but do really think the republicans argued that there were no people employed by the federal government? That's pretty much the premise of your post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EddieB.Good
Yes. Everytime the phrase "gov't doesn't create jobs" or "gov't doesn't create wealth" gets uttered, that's exactly what they're saying. Is it my fault that Republicans don't know what words mean, or how putting them together creates statements? Nope. If you have a problem w/ that, talk to the sloganeers.
I think that the problem may be that you don't think any deeper than the slogan. The Republicans in congress saying that are federal employees so I don't think they really believe the government doesn't employ anyone. Give it some thought.
The Red States have to most to lose in sequestration. Republican districts receive the bulk of government spending - both defense and welfare. The Conservative trick has always been about talking up spending cuts but never offering anything specific. This created a cognitive dissonance between what they say (cut spending!) and what they do (except medicare, defense, VA benefits, agriculture and oil subsidies...).
With real cuts now on the way, Republican voters are about to see the reality of what government cuts mean. Their bubble will burst. People will lose their jobs, go into foreclosure, and send local economies back into recession. They'll go to their Congressional representative asking what happened? Their Reps will try to deflect to Obama, and many will believe them, but a good number will finally connect the dots. Come 2014, a good number of them will get voted out of office.
Welfare belongs to Republicans?? That belongs to OBAMA!!
What stimulates the economy more: putting $5 in your savings account or $5 in a business' checking account?
What stimulates the economy more? Me spending $5 at the store or you using it dig a hole and fill it back up with dirt?
Nice way to frame it. You're operating on an imaginary premise. Is your contention is that the government is always a better investor than the taxpayer?
The point is, it depends where the money comes from and what it will be spent on.
As long as whatever you're banging your head on has the realization that 90% of the rest world already come to agree on -- gov't does create jobs & wealth -- I'm okay w/ this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rggr
I think that the problem may be that you don't think any deeper than the slogan. The Republicans in congress saying that are federal employees so I don't think they really believe the government doesn't employ anyone. Give it some thought.
I'm not the one reciting the slogan. I'm not the one agreeing w/ the slogan. Therefore, your entire point is moot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamBarrow
What stimulates the economy more? Me spending $5 at the store or you using it dig a hole and fill it back up with dirt?
It's a push. It's $5 circulating in the economy either way. That's not what I asked though.
Quote:
Nice way to frame it. You're operating on an imaginary premise.
My premise wasn't that $5 = 100% of tax revenue. It was an apples to apples comparison of $5, and my question still stands: does putting $5 in your savings account or $5 in a business' checking account stimulate the economy more?
Quote:
Is your contention is that the government is always a better investor than the taxpayer?
I'm not the one reciting the slogan. I'm not the one agreeing w/ the slogan. Therefore, your entire point is moot.
No, but you are the one acting as though a slogan is the totality of the argument. I guess there are people that are swayed by sound bites. Your stance makes you look like the stereotype of the modern electorate.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.